Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 31, 2008 Share #41 Posted March 31, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Does the Nikon t/s lens have a mechanical aperture, or will it need an electrical connection to stop down the lens? Robert Nikons are mechanical Canons are not. You want mechanical to even remotely think about using on a Leica or other system Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 31, 2008 Posted March 31, 2008 Hi Guest guy_mancuso, Take a look here Tilt Shift lenses on the M8 ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
zapp Posted March 31, 2008 Share #42 Posted March 31, 2008 Sorry, but this can't be the complete truth. Frank Actually it is the complete truth, but put in rather short sentences. If you could change the perspective of the complete image, near, far, all distances with Photoshop, it implies that you can generate 3D information from a 2D image - and most of us know that you need two eyes for easy stereo (3D) viewing). Perspective is used in too many ways here that is the main problem. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted March 31, 2008 Share #43 Posted March 31, 2008 Sorry, but this can't be the complete truth.- Its right, a lens project a 3D reality. - The result of this projektion is only a 2D view of the reality. - The geometric result on 2D view should be the same (by optical Shift or exactly correction with suitable software) Not equal can be: - effects like Tild - the quality of pixels - sw needs an interpolation. - by correcting with sw is a loss of detils/ pixels. But the geometrical apearence of the shown Details in picture should be similar. With shift lenses also one plane can be corrected exactly - the plan parallel to image- plane in the camera. For example, only the front of building wich is parallel to image- plan can be correct shown. A front of building wich isn't parralel will apear with perspective. By using shift and by using software too. regards Frank I agree, perspective rendering in 2D depends entirely on the point from which you are viewing the subject, if the camera is on a tripod with the film plane vertical and the rising front used to get a view that includes the top of a building and less foreground the verticals in the building are parrallel but perspective (i.e. the rendering of the 3D aspects of the subject in 2D) should be absolulely the same as accomplishing the same in Photoshop, the difference is only a technical issue to do with pixel interpolation. Gerry Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bernd Banken Posted March 31, 2008 Share #44 Posted March 31, 2008 Does the Nikon t/s lens have a mechanical aperture, or will it need an electrical connection to stop down the lens? Robert It's mixed, depending on the body: D300 & D3 electromagnetical aperture control, for others mechanical. Bernd Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DerAltenburger Posted March 31, 2008 Share #45 Posted March 31, 2008 I agree, perspective rendering in 2D depends entirely on the point from which you are viewing the subject, if the camera is on a tripod with the film plane vertical and the rising front used to get a view that includes the top of a building and less foreground the verticals in the building are parrallel but perspective (i.e. the rendering of the 3D aspects of the subject in 2D) should be absolulely the same as accomplishing the same in Photoshop, the difference is only a technical issue to do with pixel interpolation. Gerry Yes, that's what i mean. The difference should be only in quality by pixels - because the needed interpolation. Frank Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zapp Posted April 6, 2008 Share #46 Posted April 6, 2008 I agree, perspective rendering in 2D depends entirely on the point from which you are viewing the subject, if the camera is on a tripod with the film plane vertical and the rising front used to get a view that includes the top of a building and less foreground the verticals in the building are parrallel but perspective (i.e. the rendering of the 3D aspects of the subject in 2D) should be absolulely the same as accomplishing the same in Photoshop, the difference is only a technical issue to do with pixel interpolation. Gerry Perspective depends on your viewpoint - camera position - agreed. But, and this is rather different, perspective correction can not be done for a complete image in photoshop. The maths has been worked out for hundreds of years. With little camera tilt (of the whole camera) results from photoshop may look fine, but mathematically the correction by photoshop is not strict. The larger the tilt angle of the camera, we more obvious will this become. Again, if you could change the perspective of a single image in photoshop, this would imply that you can get 3D information from an image which is - as we all know - not possible for an image (at least for an image with any depth in it). In practise there exists no PC lens that corrsponds to the M8. Actually the same result can be accomplished with a wieder image angle like that of a 21 mm lens. Such lenses are available in native M mount, smaller size, less cost, and better image quality than PC lenses (the PC lens having a slight advantage as 100% of the image can be used, while the image with the wider angle requires some crop). Distortionwise a 21 mm lens for RF like the Biogon or the Elmarit are much much better than a shifted 24/28 mm designed for SLR cameras. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DerAltenburger Posted April 7, 2008 Share #47 Posted April 7, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Perspective depends on your viewpoint - camera position - agreed. But, and this is rather different, perspective correction can not be done for a complete image in photoshop. The maths has been worked out for hundreds of years. With little camera tilt (of the whole camera) results from photoshop may look fine, but mathematically the correction by photoshop is not strict. ??? What should that say us? Like i know, PS works with a matrix to transform the image- pixels. That can transform an exactly result. But it's difficult to set the corners of the transform- rectangle exactly. Thats why in result often is: - Shearung the Image (left or right side is moved up/ down in relation to the other side) - the ratio Width/ Heigt isn't correct. the age of maths shouldn't take any effect. Optical rules are older. Again, if you could change the perspective of a single image in photoshop, this would imply that you can get 3D information from an image which is - as we all know - not possible for an image (at least for an image with any depth in it). It's not needed to have directly 3D informations to transform an perspectivic photo to direct view (vertical to the front of a building) With knowlegde of exactly focal length used by making the photo, its' possible to transform the geometrie correctly. With DigitalPhotoShifter this can be done. The result can be similar to result by using a shift- lens. Only the quality (because interpolation) and the visible pixels are different. This Tool works mathematicaly exact like light will go through an ideal lens- system and correct exactly the perspective distortion. Important: By using a different focal length like making the photo, the result is disturbed. Internal this tool also works with a matrix to transform, like other programms, but the creation of the matrix is based on an other mathematical way - based on focal length.. regards Frank Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted April 10, 2008 Share #48 Posted April 10, 2008 Just got back from 11 days away and had to delve a few pages to see what had happened to this thread - things move fast on the M8 forum Ricci and Guy - it's exactly those effects that I was thinking about. I've seen some great portraits - can't locate the magazine right now - but a woman who carries a large format around, and uses t-shift and long exposures to capture something truly magical in her sitters. And then I'm also a sucker for extreme oof effects - taking 'still-life' shots with tiny strips of definition. The architectural correction would simply be a bonus. Anyway, we'll see - not really prepared for any more expenses after buying a new MacBookPro and the R-D1s and then the holiday... but I have to say the D300 + one of these T-S lenses still comes in at around half the cost of the M8 - so I'm sorely tempted... Thanks for the example shots to both of you! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted January 3, 2012 Share #49 Posted January 3, 2012 any new possibilties to TS on a Leica M9 ? maybe a simple TS ring for M lenses ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manolo Laguillo Posted January 4, 2012 Share #50 Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) I very often use the 28PC Super Angulon, made for the R, with the M9, via the 22228 ring. As it is a full frame camera, the 28 behaves as a real 28 .... When I have the time I use a tripod, but this is not always the case, and I shoot hand held, checking on the screen, shifting then a little bit more or a little bit less, etc, etc. After many years of working with 4x5 and 8x10 formats I know very well what I want. The M9 + the 28PC is not the perfect way, but I never had such a small "view camera", and the results are very good. Happy New Year, BTW ! Manolo Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Edited January 4, 2012 by Manolo Laguillo 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/49143-tilt-shift-lenses-on-the-m8/?do=findComment&comment=1887993'>More sharing options...
cirke Posted January 4, 2012 Share #51 Posted January 4, 2012 I very often use the 28PC Super Angulon, made for I guess you can find on ebay only a 28PC Super Angulon ? I must look for that 22228 ring thanks a lot Manolo Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted January 4, 2012 Share #52 Posted January 4, 2012 a 28PC Super Angulon with a Nikon mount will also work on Leica M9 with a Nikon to M ring (if it exists ) ? thanks Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manolo Laguillo Posted January 4, 2012 Share #53 Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) Erick, there can be a problem with the digitals M8 and M9 regarding the exact lens to sensor plane distance. Therefore, the Leica service in Solms does not guarantee that a lens adapted to the M8 or M9 via the 22228 ring will work. I don't know what can happen when a Nikon mounted 28PC is adapted to the digital M. I do have that Nikon to M ring. It's made in Italy, and it works, I tested it with Nikon lenses on my M9. Because I will never use it, it's on sale. Send me a private message if you are interested. BTW, the R to M ring that appears in the above picture is not the original 22228, it's one made in Italy. It's on on sale as well. Manolo Edited January 4, 2012 by Manolo Laguillo Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manolo Laguillo Posted January 4, 2012 Share #54 Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) it's not that difficult to find a 2nd hand 28PC with normal R mount. But be careful, sometimes the shifting mechanism can be wrong. Be sure to buy from a reputed seller with guarantee. I would look in Germany. Edited January 4, 2012 by Manolo Laguillo Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted January 4, 2012 Share #55 Posted January 4, 2012 I'll look in Germany the M9 is a wonderful camera but without TS lens I am never happy with architecture photography muchas gracias Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 4, 2012 Share #56 Posted January 4, 2012 The 28 is not a cheap lens... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted January 5, 2012 Share #57 Posted January 5, 2012 Focus stacking is how you do tilt.Might needto mask a bit to get some out of focus. Put up the grid screen. shift is dup layer. Edit> transform> perspective. Pull the corners to where they need to go. You are manufacturing pixels so there is some loss of quality. With some experience, I could use my 28 Leica R PC or 35 pc. Max shift puts the low edge 10/15 deg below horizontal. It is then just trial and error and pure waste of shutter clicks, but it works. I put them on my Nikon D3 and just observe the image. Or just hang a viso of the back of a view camera and use a front shift. swing, tilt what ever. I recommend photoshop after you get home if you travel or just use a wide lens and crop heavily. All the rest works, but is a royal pain except for a reflex camera. And you still need a tripod to do that correctly. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.